Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Which telescope should I buy?

techlad

Recommended Posts

Uplooker

Uplooker

Posted
Posted

The two scopes are very different. It is to do with the f/ ratio. The 130p reflector has an f ratio of 5 and the SkyMax has an f/ ratio of 11.8.

This means that the 130p will have significantly larger field of view. To put it really simply, the 130p would be more suited to DSOs and wide field, the SkuMax more suited to lunar, planetary and double stars.

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Schorhr

Schorhr

Posted
Posted

Hello and welcome to the Forum :-)

I have the SLT Mount, and the difference to the SW synscan AZ is minimal.

A 127 mm Mak is a nice telescope for planets, the 130/650 newtonian better suited for wide field views as the Maksutov has a relatively narrow field with, say, a 32mm Plössl eyepiece.

Goto is nice but overrated. For the same money you could buy a 8" dobsonian, a Telrad finder and maps.

A dobsonian is a very simple but sturdy mount and you will have to locate and track objects yourself, but the cheap, simple mount will leave more money for a larger telescope.

A 8" will have higher resolution, and especially deep sky views are much more stunning.

In a 5" telescope even brighter galaxies such as M51 or M101 appear as a faint glow with little to no details (depending on how dark your sky is), while with 8" you will be able to see the spiral structure of some galaxies.

http://clarkvision.com/visastro/m51-apert/

I only use the SLT mount for video astronomy, else I either use my 10" dobsonian or the Heritage 130p, that shows just as much as the 130 on SLT but costs a fragment.

Goto suggests that you won't have to do a thing, but especially with a limited view (balcony, city, woods) auto alignment may not work every time.

You will have to learn your way around the night sky anyway, and with the right book/map that's not hard at all.

The dobsonian will show more, and you just have to put it onto the ground and start looking.

I am not saying the little goto telescopes are bad, but the mount costs more then the 130mm telescope, plus it is neither very rigid nor is it well suited for astro photography (you will need a equatorial mount for exposures over 30 seconds, back focus problems with the 130p, mak focal length would require guiding for longer exposures).

For planet's it will work and is a nice kit, though visually you are limiting yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cornelius Varley

Cornelius Varley

Posted
Posted

Optically they are completely different designs. The Celeston is a newtonian reflector and the Skywatcher 127 is a Maksutov-Cassegrain .

Which one to go for depends on your requirements. If your main aim is DSO targets then you should choose the Celestron 130. If you want to view the planets and the Moon then you should go for the longer focal length Skywatcher 127. As an alternative to the Celestron 130 is the Skywatcher 130P which uses the same mirrors as the Celestron and the same mount as the Skywatcher 127 http://www.firstlightoptics.com/az-goto/skywatcher-explorer-130p-synscan-az-goto.html . With a barlow lens the 130 will also give you good views of the planets and the moon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ronin

ronin

Posted
Posted

What do you want it for?

Not sure if goto is overrated as at 2 clubs I can get to about 80% of the scopes at each are goto's, so they have to have some thing going for them to be in the numbers they are. Suppose it is a bit like satnav in a car, whats wrong with road signs. But satnav is basically a standard items now, and people expect and want it.

The 130 will give the wider views and is for that reason the easier to get along with for general use.

Will say now that neither is overly suited to imaging, certainly not DSO's which require long exposures, so if there is the vague idea to drift into that you may need a rethink. Both should manage planetary imaging (webcam), the 127 being slightly better suited. Note there are not really any planets around to image for about 6 months.

Forget the database, if there are 42,900 in the 127 database about 42,000 of them will be pointless or irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
techlad

techlad

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks everyone for the welcome and quick, friendly, helpful replies.  It's good of you all.  Your responses lead me to ask more questions and provide more info!

Are there any other options in the £250 to £380 range? 

Want something that will be a general all rounder.  

What's the difference (in the telescope) between looking at DSO's and planets/the moon? 

Not bothered about imaging using a camera.

Cheers, Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterCPC

PeterCPC

Posted
Posted

One other thing to consider is the issue of collimation. A newtonian like the Celestron will need to be collimated from time to time but the Mak will hold it's collimation better. It's not difficult to collimate a Newtonian but you may not want the hassle. If you want a scope that does not need collimating you could also consider a refractor like this one http://www.firstlightoptics.com/az-goto/skywatcher-startravel-102-synscan-az-goto.html.

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LukeSkywatcher

LukeSkywatcher

Posted
Posted

Optically they are completely different designs. The Celeston is a newtonian reflector and the Skywatcher 127 is a Maksutov-Cassegrain .

Which one to go for depends on your requirements. If your main aim is DSO targets then you should choose the Celestron 130. If you want to view the planets and the Moon then you should go for the longer focal length Skywatcher 127. As an alternative to the Celestron 130 is the Skywatcher 130P which uses the same mirrors as the Celestron and the same mount as the Skywatcher 127 http://www.firstlightoptics.com/az-goto/skywatcher-explorer-130p-synscan-az-goto.html . With a barlow lens the 130 will also give you good views of the planets and the moon. 

I always say/think that there are many many more DSO's out there then there are planets. So you should pick a scope that will allow you the best views possible of the DSO's, because to be honest, the same scope will also show you the planets. What's the point in buying a scope that really will only show the 9 planets (yes i said 9) and will not work very well on the countless DSO's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charic

Charic

Posted
Posted

Any general view on which telescope I should go for in the recommnded telescopes above? 

Any other suggestions in the price range I am looking in? 

Cheers!

Hi, If you were local to me, I could show you my Celestron 127EQ Powerseeker and the Skywatcher Skyliner 200P. You would want to walk away with the Skyliner after you had used it. I don't think your Nexstar choice would provide any better results than my Celestron( 127EQ very poor in my opinion )  and the only advantage for some with the Nexstar, is the GoTo feature, but that still needs special and careful setting up EVERY time you use the telescope. My 127EQ has NO COMPETITION against the Skyliner. 

I know its almost impossible, but see if you can visit a club or someone you know. You really must try the telescopes first. It will save a lot of money and heartache in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.